Daniel

I've been reading the book of Daniel. It occurred to me that, though it didn't happen through conquest, we conservative constitutionalists are in a similar situation as Daniel. Stuck in exile in a land we don't recognize, a land with alien values. . . our liberties curtailed.

In the last month or so, I've been discouraged enough to just not write in my blog. I wouldn't even look at it or at anyone else's blog. I felt originally that God wanted me to start this blog. I already had a "home" blog that I could write about little things, my dogs, my cats and cooking. . . But I felt led to create a blog about the big things: God and America, and how we relate. I felt some great purpose to this little blog.

But I saw no evidence that anyone -- other than a friend or two, in which case, I was preaching to the choir -- was reading my blog. So what's the use? Thus began my discouragement. And yes, I reminded myself that we can't always know the results of God's commands; we must only do them. But that didn't help me come back.

This discouragement is tied together with the feeling that I get when I call and write our senators' and representative's offices and get a polite acknowledgment, or worse, a response that explains to me why they choose to vote contrarily. The anxiety, the urgency within me, the need to do something, anything! is hardening to a husk of what it was. What's the use?

In the prospect of long-term exile, Daniel and his friends behaved in a way to glorify God. Their home, homeland, capital city was shattered. They had been, in essence, kidnapped, and taken to Babylon to serve the king. I wonder how much time and effort they spent in trying to get away. Or did they from the start give it all up to God?

When my Christian friends shrug and say, "These are the last days," and their attitude is to basically roll with it, accept it, I get really irritated. We can't just bend over and take it! This is not the time to withdraw and wait on the Lord! That's abdicating our responsibility.

First, Daniel and company made sure that they were able to continue to glorify God through maintaining dietary standards -- not with a protest fast, but with a suggestion of a scientific experiment. In order to get this far, they had to treat their jailers, the chief of eunuchs and the steward over him, as people, not as evil enemies. I'm sure that if God had not brought Daniel into the favor of the chief of eunuchs, whatever he suggested would have been dismissed out of hand. But the chief explained to Daniel the reason for the food they were having to eat. And Daniel could come back with this suggestion that they compare the results of the two diets after ten days. And in case you don't know the story, Daniel's diet of vegetables and water kept him and friends much healthier than those who'd been eating the king's delicacies and drinking the wine.

Their training was to last for three years, but even before that time was up, Daniel had his first big break in being able to tell the king his dream and interpret it. It was into their second year there.

Hmm, we've been in exile only a few months. We have to see ourselves as being in it for the long run. Even if we are able to put politicians with integrity (boy, is that an oxymoron!) into office in 2010, we will still be fighting an overall attitude of relativism and a lack of understanding of the Constitution.

And Daniel lasted as wise man, counselor for the king, through King Nebuchadnezzar's reign, the short reign of his son, Belshazzar, the reign of Darius the Mede, and Cyrus the Persian. (This is where I am in the book of Daniel.)

What struck me is that through Daniel's behavior, all these kings knew God to be the "living God, steadfast forever." They didn't necessarily give up their own gods, but they recognized God and His power.

Let this be a wake up call. We've been called bitter clingers; let us now cling even more tightly to God. The anxiety is counter-productive. At the same time, let us not relax and give up our responsibility as citizens. That's part of the problem and why we are in this mess.

When I told a liberal (progressive) friend that I was planning to go to Washington, DC, to protest on the 4th of July, she said, "It's good that you're finally getting involved."

I said, "Thank you," but I was miffed. What do you mean finally getting involved? I've been involved all along. I've been doing the things we're supposed to do -- informing myself and voting. But . . . that wasn't everything we needed to be doing, I realize now. I think we have abdicated our responsibility as citizens, assuming if we voted correctly, then these politicians will keep the country running. It's like those parents who send their children to school with the idea that now they don't have to do much in the training of their kids. While protesting should not have to be a normal part of an involved citizen's life, when the citizen has allowed things to get out of hand, protesting is perhaps the last option.

We should have been training our children about the steadfastness of the Constitution, about our founding fathers and their vision, and making sure that our educational system doesn't allow the insidious changes, revisionist history, etc. to make inroads into our children's minds. In my defense, I didn't know about these things. But responsible citizenry requires much more thorough education than we got in K-12 and even through college.

We should have been keeping an eye on our representatives, both state and federal, following what they were voting on and how they voted, and expressing our educated opinion at every turn. If we had, they would not have been able to vote themselves an automatic pay increase every year, for example.

The US that Obama envisions and the results, which we envision, cannot be more alien to us than Babylon to Daniel. We must find a way to work within the framework we are given, so that when it's all said and done, God will be glorified.

Young Man on a Bicycle

My sign at the Albuquerque Tea Party read "BASTA!" because I wanted to make a unique one for New Mexico, so I figured the simple Spanish word for "enough!" would be good. It was funny when I was drawing it out at the sign-making party. I drew B-A-S-T, and my daughter started asking, "What are you writing? Don't you know this is a family friendly thing?"

Well, it looks like not as many people knew Spanish as I expected. Several people asked what it meant. My daughter enjoyed waving the sign for awhile. With her body-modification -- tattoos, piercings, and brandings -- she figured people would take her as an "infiltrator." And if they didn't know what the word "basta" meant, then they might really take her as an infiltrator.

But there came a time when I had the sign.

A young man on a bicycle was passing behind us (we stood right on the edge of the curb to get the drivers' attention) and he stopped suddenly and asked me, "What does your sign say?"

"Basta. It means 'enough.'"

He nodded and started on his way, but turned back. "Enough . . . what?" He was taller than I and had to lean his head down to hear me with all the yelling and cheering going on.

"Enough spending. You know, the budget, stimulus, all that." I was yelling over the noise.

"So the spending from the previous eight years wasn't enough to justify protesting?"

"Oh, we didn't like it. We were pissed about that, starting with the prescription drug thing. My husband even changed parties over that."

"But you didn't protest."

"No," I agreed. "But Obama's spending was just SO much and SO fast, we had to do something more."

"If it hadn't been Obama, would you have protested?"

I tried to answer him honestly. I mean this young man was listening to my answers and asking good questions -- something I crave to get from liberals around me. So I said, "I think whoever it was, if he went more slowly, we might not have protested. We would still think we could do something about it. But this happened so fast."

"So if Obama had spent more slowly, you might not have protested?"

"Possibly. If he'd spent more slowly and not so much at once."

He nodded and thanked me, mounted his bike and rode on.

But now I have more to say. You know how it is. Only hours, if not days, after the event, you think of what you should have said.

I would have said, had I had my wits about me at that point, that we conservatives don't protest. That's the domain of liberals. They'll protest and demonstrate at the drop of a hat. I bet they all have a protest kit made up and sitting next to the door just in case they decide to protest and get the call. We conservatives, on the other hand, call our representatives, write letters to them and to the editor of local papers, send emails, voice our opinions on talk radio, and try to make changes through the voting process. We don't even think of protesting. That's almost as foreign to us as suing someone for offending us, as foreign as using the courts to make social and legal change.

When Heather Wilson supported the SCHIPS bill and was on Jim Villanucci's show, people blasted her. I blasted her in an email.

I can't tell you how pissed I was that Bush went ahead and signed the TARP bill, in spite of the "no" vote of Congress. This was stomping on the constitution, as far as I was concerned. But he was on his way out. No use "firing" him! I had to focus my energy on what was happening after that.

The fact that there were . . . it seemed like 5,000 conservatives (pretty much all fiscal conservatives -- some Republicans, some Libertarians, some Independents, even some Democrats) there doing something they don't usually do should say we're really, really mad. And we're serious. And when our usual methods seemed to have no effect on the conduct of Congress and the White House, we were driven to protesting.

Not that I regret it. It was a blast. But I wonder if our politicians heard us, or if they're covering their ears with their hands and going, "La, la, la, la, la!"